Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

dogbolter writes "South Australian Attorney General, Michael Atkinson, infamous for the banning of R18+ rated games and the censoring of political comment in Australia, has quit. The recent South Australian election provided a massive swing against Atkinson's governing labor party. As a direct result of the South Australian election result, he is standing down. Hopefully someone with half a clue will assume the vacant post and overturn the decision to ban adult oriented computer games."

...the potential for evil. There is no guarantee that the replacement will be less clueless or less malevolent towards the pastimes of modern society. With a little good luck, some of Atkinson's stupider decisions and stances will be reversed. Politicians, however, are more adept at finding and deploying bad luck than good.

well theres a federal election coming up in australia in november. i dont think his seat is up for election this term, but if there is a swing far enough in labors favor, he wont hold the balance of power anymore, and hence have little influence.

You responded to a post about Conroy, not Fielding. A swing to Labor means more power for Conroy, not less. As for the election, it might be in November, but possibly not, depending on Rudd's poll numbers.

A lot of game shops have petitions to sign - Aussies, if you are dropping by one to pick up the latest austrlian-modified (aka heavily-censored) version of whatever, ask to sign the petition. (I found one to sign, right at the front of the store "GAME", in the Brisbane CBD).
More info about the craziness of no R18+ games for Australia is Here [r18games.com.au]

I know I will be called a troll for asking this: but how is the SA AG's view on computer games flawed? It should be obvious to anyone that he believes that the views of his constituency (which BTW is more than just teenaged and 18-25 year old anglophone middle class computer-literate males) are not supportive of a "wider range" of content in video games. Given what he does, his decision is quite sensible.

To cater to the sensibilities of other people, and decide that their needs come before some others, do

DOESN'T mean he'll stop. He may not hold the political office anymore but he may become what Jack Thompson has been for us Americans. A real pain in the ass that doesn't seem to know how to stay down. .

DOESN'T mean he'll stop. He may not hold the political office anymore but he may become what Jack Thompson has been for us Americans. A real pain in the ass that doesn't seem to know how to stay down.

He'll end up preaching to the same small choir. I doubt he'll get anywhere near the level of attention that Thomson gets. The only significant group of people in Australia who actually care about R18+ gamers are the gamers who want to play R18+ games.

He may not hold the political office anymore but he may become what Jack Thompson has been for us Americans. A real pain in the ass that doesn't seem to know how to stay down.

Thompson is hardly a pain in the ass, as that would require him to be somewhat effective. If anything, his lunatic raving has worked in favour of game players and -publishers, since he makes the anti-gaming side look bad by association.

You mean disbarred so he can no longer work in his chosen profession and then become so irrelevant that people that formerly supported him are "distancing themselves" from him as he goes down? Yeah, that would be too bad...

how is the SA AG's view on computer games flawed? It should be obvious to anyone that he believes that the views of his constituency...are not supportive of a "wider range" of content in video games.

First of all, he doesn't believe that. In a recent letter he wrote about this, he stated "this issue has little traction with my constituents who are more concerned with real-life issues than home entertainment in imaginary worlds". So it seems that he is not representing the will of his constituents, but he thinks that they don't care about it.

As to why it is flawed, that is because it is so out of step with the rest of the country. Adding an R rating for video games requires the agreement of all Attorneys General of all the states. Michael Atkinson is the only one who will not agree to it, despite the evidence suggesting that the majority of Australians support the introduction.

The main problem is that it doesn't stop kids from seeing adult games. In fact, because there is no R rating, games that would have received that tend to get MA15+ ratings. Those that aren't banned, that is.

It's mostly because what he's trying to do and what's actually doing are two very different things.

Here in Australia, anything which is Refused Classification(RC) is, in effect, banned. If/When the new internet filter gets put in then apparently even websites talking about RC games or other material will be blocked in part or whole. Since there is no R rating, anything which would receive one is instead RC.

This has a number of negative effects of course. For the purposes of this guy one of the most important is that the ratings board which is of course "at arms length from the political process" which is supposed to mean unaffected by politics, but really means unaccountable to voters, despite their generally rather stodgy views do not particularly like banning things. They perhaps feel that banning things is a really rather serious action to take.

This means that a lot of material which should probably be in the lower end of the R rating band gets pushed down into the MA15+ band, because while it's not exactly appropriate it's not exactly ban worthy either. This means that the upper end of MA15+ is full of a lot of stuff which really isn't necessarily appropriate for someone who is 15 years old to be able to buy on their own without mum and dad being vaguely aware that it's being bought.

Personally I dislike games like manhunt and the other over the top gore games and wouldn't be at all sad if they had never been made at all, but I also feel that Fallout 3, while I personally loved it, is probably a bit borderline for some younger players. Under the current law games like that get pushed into the MA15+ rating zone when they would probably be more comfortable in the R region(and of course the drug animations could have remained in all copies of the game rather than being cut because of this very reason).

Atkinson's position is counterproductive to what he actually wants to accomplish.

Importing RC is illegal - you most certainly could have been warned/fined/jailed for importing RC material!
I might be legal to possess, but if they take away any legal means to obtain it (via Internet censorship) then they are doing the same thing.

Well, let's see. If I download an RC game, I've committed copyright infringement and can be prosecuted, if I buy it oversees and import it then I am breaking the law and can be prosecuted, if someone else imports it and sells or gives it to me they can be prosecuted. About the only way to legally obtain an RC game is to write it yourself, so yes it's a ban.

Then apparently even websites talking about RC games or other material will be blocked in part or whole.

Actually, RC computer games will be explicitly left out of the mandatory filtering until a review is finalised on how to classify them. (According to http://openinternet.com.au/learn_more/ [openinternet.com.au] anyway)

Every independent survey run found wide support for an R rating for games amoung the Australian community: Link [smh.com.au] (reference in there to a survey finding 88% support). Atkinson is considerably more conservative than his base on the issue - this is (or was) a politician's individual crusade, not him representing his electorate.

The point is that a cabinet minister has to consider more than just the views of his electorate, he has to work for the good of the whole state. Approximately 11200 people voted for Michael Atkinson (as their first preference) in the lower house, whereas about 8300 voted for Gamers 4 Croydon as their first preference for the Upper house (just shy of 10000 votes were distributed to their candidate before he was excluded), and several of the other minor parties also support an r18+ rating for games.These is a

It should be obvious to anyone that he believes that the views of his constituency (which BTW is more than just teenaged and 18-25 year old anglophone middle class computer-literate males) are not supportive of a "wider range" of content in video games.

Let's say that I don't believe in setting aside reservations for Native Americans, or giving them special rights with regard to gambling. I feel that it makes them second class citizens, and stunts their ability to be contributing members of a larger society.

So I should get a say in what happens to them, right? Just because I have an opinion? Even though eliminating reservations or leaving them be would have virtually no effect on my life what-so-ever?

I know I will be called a troll for asking this: but how is the SA AG's view on computer games flawed? It should be obvious to anyone that he believes that the views of his constituency (which BTW is more than just teenaged and 18-25 year old anglophone middle class computer-literate males) are not supportive of a "wider range" of content in video games. Given what he does, his decision is quite sensible.

To cater to the sensibilities of other people, and decide that their needs come before some others, does not necessarily make him "anti" anyone. Just like how if x is not larger than 3, it does not automatically make is smaller than 3, but it could also be equal.

Even if this is the view of his constituency, you're talking about tyranny of the majority, which is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, problem with a democratic government.

I know I will be called a troll for asking this: but how is the SA AG's view on computer games flawed? It should be obvious to anyone that he believes that the views of his constituency (which BTW is more than just teenaged and 18-25 year old anglophone middle class computer-literate males) are not supportive of a "wider range" of content in video games. Given what he does, his decision is quite sensible.

The judicial role is to prevent tyranny of the mob. Just because most people don't like it is not reason to ban something (in theory - I know this doesn't hold well in reality). To ban something you need to prove harm to others. Banning things performed in your own home that does not harm others is against most constitutions and against the founding principles of most western democracies. It isn't the AG's role to curry favour with the electorate. It is to prevent the electorate from using superior num

1) Are you really advocating tyranny by majority? Censorship is evil, popular support does not make it OK.
2) There was no evidence of "majority" support. Maybe Atkinson did believe it, but he certainly wasn't listening to his constituents.
3) [minor issue] Your gaming demographic is off. The average age is over 25, and most of them are quite computer illiterate.

It is a worthwhile question. A big piece of the answer is that his constituency does not believe in the censoring, even if only a small percentage of them are actively pushing him for the 18+ rating. He is also the lone holdout among other AGs, so his personal opinion is running pretty strongly against, well, everyone. He stopped 'representing' and is instead pushing his personal agenda.

Nations other than the United States of America? Nations which don't use English as the language of commerce and teaching? Nations which are not based on European culture or otherwise have majority white populations?

Japan, China, Taiwan, South Korea, Russia, India, Brazil, Cuba, Canada, and others. (oh, wait Canada is all of what you said you didn't want)

"Nations which don't use English as the language of commerce and teaching?"

Alright, I get it now, you're yanking my chain... you can drop it.

"Nations which are not based on European culture or otherwise have majority white populations?"

Is that supposed to be some kind of sick joke? Well, it's not funny if it is.

Seriously though, such nations and cultures are more than welcome to have websites dealing with whatever issues they like in whatever language they like... many already do. Slashdot does not have to be that site. In fact, it doesn't even have to be a site most white, English speaking Americans are interested in.

I see your observation that Slashdot does not cater to the demographic of "everybody in the world" and raise you the observation that "it doesn't have to, and probably shouldn't".

I don't go on Orkut and bitch that everyone is from Brazil, and nothing on the website specifies it is for Brazilians... but that's sometimes how things turn out.

Slashdot has the content that it has, serves the people that it serves, and the people who complain that it does not meet their tastes are perfectly within their rights to find another website that does. That is true regardless of whether those differing interests involve preference, cultural background, location, language, political

How so? I have nothing against other people, I simply acknowledge that we are simply different.

I am not fluent in Swedish, I have no interest in becoming fluent in Swedish, and it is of only very little interest to me what is happening in Sweden, and I expect that a non-English-speaking Swede feels very similarly about where I live. For what possible reason should either of us feel obligated to visit the same websites or take the same interests?

It is good enough. He was the one person in Australia who was preventing the R18+ rating from being introduced. He wasn't just one politician who was against it, he was someone who had veto power over the entire thing. Now that he is out of that key role, the way is clear for all Attorneys General to allow the change to go through.

To my knowledge he didn't 'ban' R18+ games, he simply didn't agree with the vote - which was required by each AG to get it through.You could say he effectively banned them but it's more his lack of support than anything.

Also he stepped back into a backbench role, he's still in politics although yes we do REALLY hope someone with a clue steps up for his old position.As a Victorian I'm glad to see him go, the capital of this one state of South Australia, Adelaide is referred to as "the city of churches" (quite seriously) these morons have been causing the rest of the country for too long.

Now if we can just get rid of this Stephen Conroy idiot, maybe Australia won't be a laughing stock for tech news and articles for a while again.Good riddance Atkinson, good riddance.

Now if we can just get rid of this Stephen Conroy idiot, maybe Australia won't be a laughing stock for tech news and articles for a while again.

If possible please help to get the word out to send emails of support to Joe Hockey, an MP who has strongly and vocally opposed the internet filter and is doing a damn good job! If we as a community show support so such people im sure they are likely to continue with those actions!

It wasn't a great election result for Gamers4croydon [gamers4croydon.org], who were standing against the Attorney General on the platform of allowing R18+ ratings. They only received 3.7% of the vote [sa.gov.au]. In fact, there were more informal (or invalid) votes at 5%.

Still, they will be happy with the final outcome, even if it wasn't a victory for grass roots campaigning.

More importantly were the Greens coming in third all over the place, becoming the alternate to Labour rather than going to the right. In this case the right wanted to buy 500 tasers to tackle anyone they deemed as hooligans, the electric whip and so called conservatives always seem to go hand in hand. The reality is of course their is nothing conservative about using torture devices on citizens that is purely the field of radicals and fundamentalists.

Shock Horror, the system worked. Sorry for the rant but after numerous threads about the issue and countless uniformed "why don't you Aussies do something" posts I think we can are entitled to a little schadenfreude. We dealt with Atkinson within the system. I wonder how Conroy is feeling about now, between the censorship and NBN debacle he hasn't many people left who like him enough to vote for him.

However we can be certain the people behind Atkinson who are the driving the anti-game agenda aren't quitting as easily but still, this is a step in the right direction and I think it will be very hard for the puritans to replace Atkinson on the ratings board.

I reduce at that prick being thrown out, but I am not calling it a victory or that the system works until I hear his replacement is not a self righteous prick that puts his own views before that of the people./

I wonder how Conroy is feeling about now, between the censorship and NBN debacle he hasn't many people left who like him enough to vote for him.

As long as Conroy retains top billing in the Senate, he doesn't have much reason to worry. He's considerably less popular than other Labor senators, but because of internal factional politics, he's pretty much guaranteed top billing.

An overwhelming majority of Labor voters will mark "1" above the line and think nothing of it, if Conroy goes, it will be because Labor, not Australia as a whole, pushes him.

An overwhelming majority of Labor voters will mark "1" above the line and think nothing of it, if Conroy goes, it will be because Labor, not Australia as a whole, pushes him.

Until Conroy's seat comes up for re-election. I don't know if Conroy is up for re-election this term or not.

I would say it's quite possible that Conroy will be "pushed" by Rudd after the next election, first they bought in Kate Lundy to act as his understudy then they start giving more air time to Lundy and using Lundy to water dow

Since almost everyone votes for the party (above the line) there are two possibilities that will result in him loosing his seat: a) he's moved from his current top position in the labor list to #3 or #4. It's still possible for him to get elected again if he's at #3 but unlikely. He's currently one of the leaders of the Labor Right faction in the Labor party, so even going from #1 to #2 position is unlikely.

And in the meanwhile, in Switzerland, politicians have passed the first step for making a law [mcvuk.com] targeting all games that "require cruel acts of violence against humans and humanlike creatures for in-game success”. The objective of this law is to make it forbidden to produce, advertise, import, sell or distribute such games. It seems, however, that this is not the final vote, and there is a real possibility that public outrage [www.tdg.ch], from gamers as well as games companies, could bring the politicians to back down on this, and simply make it forbidden in the law to sell 18-rated PEGI games to minors.

Atkinson's censorship of games is a part of a pattern of behaviour. This is the man who also passed a law making anonymous speech illegal specifically for this election campaign. [techdirt.com] He then had the cheek, after intense criticism, to say if he was re-elected he'd remove it after the election. It's likely that this was more damaging to the Labor party in this election than the R18 issue.

I am very happy to hear he no longer holds office, as I detest the man and what he stands for. Australia is now a slightly better place. Next up, hopefully, Conroy and the internet filter.

Atkinson still holds office. He was re-elected to the South Australian parliament and will have some say in government policy as a result. He's simply standing down as AG and is now on the backbench, ie, not holding a ministerial post. He's also a powerbroker for one of the factions, which is why he was made AG in the first place and why he held that position for so long.

From what he's said, he'll be retiring at the next election. He said that it would be irresponsible to force a by-election at this time w

This is good lets hope the guy never again gets into a position where
he can threaten our freedoms and liberty. Not only was he against the R classification for
games but he was also an advocate for Internet and press censorship.

A lot of people here apparently haven't bothered to read even the summary, and as such are assuming we took a stand and kicked this guy out of office. This isn't true. Michael Atkinson won the election easily, and then announced he wouldn't be taking the job anyway, instead moving to a back-bench position in the Labour government to retire in 2014.

Yes, the arsehole is going, but no, we didn't beat him. The vast majority of voters, as always, don't know or care about these issues, so the battle is far from

Hopefully someone with half a clue will assume the vacant post and overturn the decision to ban adult oriented computer games

Wasn't that the problem in the first place, that this was someone with only half a clue?

This is so often the case, that people only understand enough to get scared or decide that they don't like it; I suspect we all do it, sometimes - I know I do. The thing is - that kind of people are also valuable members of society, and in a democracy we have to try to find a compromise that accomodates the interests of at least a majority of people.

To me it seems that the importance of games is hugely overstated. A comp